Historical Plausibility of Paul's Story

quote:

---

We are only questioning the historical plausibility of the events surrounding his 'conversion' experience.

---

Is the fact that Paul was expelled from the christian-jewish sect in Jerusalem, any impact on what is described as conversion? Prior to Paul, there was no doctrines or belief of later christianity, which better accords with a new religion happening here, than one which he converted to.I note also, that Paul and jesus never met, and the people of the region, aside from [now called] Europeans, never agreed with Paul - including the Arab-muslims of this region. Thus Paul, not jesus, was the breakdown of christianity from its mother religion. The advocations of Paul were also an emulation of a war between Hellenist Greeks and Jews 250 years previously: the same doctrines were made, and rejected by the Jews.This makes everything attributed as coming from a jewish Jesus incredibly non-credible, being said only by third party reportings, well outside its spacetime. There is no evidence the current christian doctrines were said by, or condoned by, Jesus, or any other jew/s in all recorded history or archeology; only its non-confusing reverse is evidential.

quote:

---

I could continue but the life of this man has been well documented and researched [and debated] countless times. The information 'is' out there it's just a matter of finding it.

---

I don't think so. All the references quoted are from the NT, from a different spacetime and motive. The quotes about the jews wanting to kill Paul is not related to christianity, but his advocations which directly contradicted the core beliefs of judaism held for 2000 years. Here, the notion of pharisee, etc also cannot relate to their being overly strict; there was no sector in Judaism which agreed with Paul, as there cannot be any Judaism, nor any sector of it, with Paul. Also, that Paul was accepted like a wild fire, is only related to peoples outside Judaism, mainly there was an already waiting audience for what Paul said: he could not have failed if he tried.This amalgamation proposal was already preceded with the greeks, who became very closely attached to the OT after their translation of it in 300 BCE [The septuagint]. They proposed, that Moses be made a universeal figure for all humanity, and the Jews accepted it. This sublime notion fell down because the greeks also wanted the God of Zeus and israel to become melted and form one new image for worship - which contradicted the core laws of judaism. It could never succeed when Paul made such proposals. In 70 CE, all this came to a head, when Jews became the only nation which refused Rome's decree to worship a divine emperor in their temple, resulting in the greatest defense of a faith in all recorded history: over a million Jews gave their lives, country and Jerusalem, fighting to the last man standing in the temple and at Masada.What is required, and does not appear to exist, is a shred of hard copy, contemporanous relic, such as a writing manuscript or scroll, preferably in Hebrew - agreeing with anything stated here of Paul and the Pharisees. This was a time when writings was commonplace and copious: Josephus, Dead Sea Scrolls, Jewish writings, Roman writings, etc. There is no excuse for the total vacansee of proof at this time - except that the Gospel writings occured in another spacetime than what it is describing.